Judgment ( 1. ) THIS is a sales tax reference made under Section 44 (1) of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958 (since repealed) called "the Act" henceforth at the instance of State (Commissioner of Sales Tax) by the Board of Revenue in Reference Case No. 7-2/5/74/94 dated March 26, 1998 which arise out of an appellate order dated May 18, 1994 passed by Board in appeal No. 99-PBR/91 to answer the following question of law by this Court: Whether under the facts and under circumstances of the case the Tribunal was justified in holding that stay wire is included in goods specified in Section 14 (iv) (xv) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 and therefore subject to tax at 4 per cent as declared goods. ( 2. ) HEARD Shri A. S. Agrawal, learned Government advocate for the applicant and Shri G. M. Chaphekar, learned Senior Counsel with Shri Pancholia, learned Counsel for the non-applicant. ( 3. ) THE respondent is a registered dealer under the Act. They are engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of wire and stay wire. ( 4. ) THE question arose before the sales tax authorities as to whether stay wire is taxable at the rate of 4 per cent under the entry contained in Section 14 (iv) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. The relevant entry amongst 16 reads as under: Wire rods and wires--rolled, drawn, galvanised, aluminised, tinned or coated such as by copper. ( 5. ) THIS question was eventually decided by the Board of Revenue in favour of respondent/assessee/dealer in the case of this very assessee in a case reported in Vora Wires, Indore v. Commissioner of Sales Tax (1992) 14 Cur T. J. 294 on January 14, 1992. This is what the learned Members held in para 6 of the report: Para 6.--On the question whether stay wire is iron and steel or not, the learned Counsel for the department did not advance any argument. Under Section 14 (iv) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 there are sixteen different categories of iron and steel one of which is-wire rods and wires--rolled, drawn, galvanised, aluminised, tinned or coated such as by copper. The word rolled means spirally wound or bent spirally upon itself into a nearly cylindrical form or a part turned over in a curve, etc. The word rolled means spirally wound or bent spirally upon itself into a nearly cylindrical form or a part turned over in a curve, etc. Therefore, rolled wire would mean spirally wound wires or wires spirally bent upon itself into nearly cylindrical form or wire turned over in a curve. In the case of stay wire, more than one wire are lightly twisted or bent in order to add the strength of the wire. The wires are not welded together; they can be unleashed to their original position of single wires. Therefore, stay wire would really be rolled wire which is nothing but wire as classified under Section 14 (iv) of the Central Act. The contention of the learned C. A. for the appellant must, therefore, be accepted. ( 6. ) RELYING upon the said view, the Board in the case for subsequent period out of which this reference arise directed the assessing officer to make assessment of the commodity in question, i. e. , stay wire at the rate of 4 per cent as specified in Section 14 (iv) (xv) of the Central Sales Tax Act quoted supra. ( 7. ) HAVING heard learned Counsel for the parties and having examined the issue, we are inclined to uphold the view/reasoning of the Board quoted supra and hence, answer the reference against the State and in favour of assessee/dealer. ( 8. ) LEARNED Counsel for the State was unable to cite any authority taking contrary view. He, however, placed reliance on the decision of the Supreme Court reported in [1998] 108 STC 258 : (1999) 32 VKN 161 (K. A. K. Anwar and Co. v. State of Tamil Nadu ). In our opinion, this decision does not apply to the facts of this case. It is distinguishable. In that case, the question was, whether dressed hides and skins are different commodities from that of raw hides and skins. Their Lordship held that they are. In this case, such question is not involved. That apart, some of the observations sought to be relied on by the learned Counsel for the State from this decision cannot be of any help to answer the question involved in this case in favour of State. Same is with the decision relied on by him in the case of State of Tamil Nadu v. Pyare Lal Malhotra. That apart, some of the observations sought to be relied on by the learned Counsel for the State from this decision cannot be of any help to answer the question involved in this case in favour of State. Same is with the decision relied on by him in the case of State of Tamil Nadu v. Pyare Lal Malhotra. , AIR1976 SC 800 , 1983 (13 )ELT1582 (SC ), (1976 )1 SCC834 , [1976 ]3 SCR168 , [1976 ]37 STC319 (SC ). The same also does not answer the question in States favour. ( 9. ) IN our opinion the Board has taken a reasonable view of the case quoted supra while explaining the real intention of the Legislature as also keeping in view the use of the stay wire. The entry quoted supra does include within its sweep such kind of wires which are manufactured and used in a particular type specified in the entry. ( 10. ) SINCE we concur with the reasoning assigned by Board on the question and being in full agreement with the same, we do not wish to burden our judgment by narrating any more facts and/or legal position. ( 11. ) ACCORDINGLY and in view of aforesaid discussion, we answer the question referred to this Court against the State and in favour of dealer /assessee, i. e. , respondent. No costs.